The
GOGP filed its original complaint on December 03, 2013. It was quickly
followed by a barrage of procedural challenges from the Defendants,
because the last thing that they want the court to do is to decide this
case on its merits. Obviously, these government agencies do not want to
be forced to defend their rebuilding plan that clearly seeks to
maintain segregated Public Housing in the City of Galveston for many
years to come. Their hope is that their culpability and responsibility
for this plan will disappear with a dismissal.

Their primary challenge is to the standing of the GOGP and the
individual Plaintiffs to bring the case, but the selectivity with which
they employ this tactic needs to be carefully examined.

The present case began when Lone Star Legal Aid (LSLA) challenged the
demolition and rebuilding plans of Defendant GHA. They filed an
Administrative Complaint with HUD and threatened to sue if they did not
get the rebuilding plan they wanted. LSLA did not represent individual
minority or disabled plaintiffs, and the organization did not offer any
evidence that they suffered an injury in fact, which is essential to
gain standing, and yet Defendants HUD, the City of Galveston and the
GHA did NOT challenge their standing!
Why? The LSLA did NOT demand an end to racial, ethnic and
economic segregation, in Galveston Public Housing. Their demands were
much more superficial. These Defendants not only did not challenge
their standing, they quickly agreed to their terms.

Later, Texas Appleseed and TXLIHIS filed an Administrative Complaint
with HUD and threatened to sue if they did not get the rebuilding plan
that they wanted. Texas Appleseed and TXLIHIS did not represent
individual minority or disabled plaintiffs, and their organizations did
not offer any evidence that they suffered an injury in fact, and yet
Defendants HUD, TDHCA, the City of Galveston and the GHA did NOT
challenge their standing. Why? Texas Appleseed and TXLIHIS did NOT
demand an end to racial, ethnic and economic segregation in
Galveston Public Housing. Like LSLA, their demands were
much more superficial.These Defendants not only did not
challenge their standing, they quickly agreed to their terms.

The Defendants seem to be willing to make many superficial changes to
their rebuilding plan, to avoid litigation, if the essential element is
maintained; they must continue to be built in impoverished minority
neighborhoods in the City of Galveston. However, they are completely
unwilling to consider building Public Housing in high-opportunity
neighborhoods throughout the County which would end racial, ethnic and
economic segregation in this city and county. The nature and scope of
the requested change seems to be what determines whether the Defendants
will mount a standing challenge.

On March 5, Plaintiffs' counsel
filed a Brief
in Support of our Standing to bring the case. The research
that was done to prepare the Brief confirms that both the GOGP and the
individual Plaintiffs are on very solid ground!

One of the most revealing aspects of the numerous Motions to Dismiss,
generated by the Defendants, is that none of them will take any
responsibility for this plan. They all point their fingers at the other
Defendants. Their rebuilding plan is an "orphan" without a "parent"
that will claim it. They all vigorously defend it, but none of them
want to own it. Ownership reflects very badly on the owner.

The Defendants' case has also been made dramatically more difficult to
defend by the fact that HUD and the GLO have denied the Beaumont
Housing Authority approval to rebuild Public Housing in
similarly "impacted" neighborhoods, because it would "fail to
Affirmatively Further Fair Housing", while they demand that it be built
in "impacted" neighborhoods in Galveston. Like Galveston, Beaumont is
also subject to the Conciliation Agreement.

This is still another reason why the Defendants are so anxious for a
dismissal. They don't want to be forced to explain this dramatic
discrepancy to the judge!

The Plaintiffs' primary case was filed on February 17 as an Application
for a Preliminary Injunction attempting to halt this plan
that seeks to continue segregated Public Housing in the City of
Galveston. It was supported by 44 exhibits, encompassing about 1,900
pages, and a video of Dr. Kirk McClure telling the Galveston City
Council that the Defendants' rebuilding plan would fail to
Affirmatively Further Fair Housing.

The GOGP remains very confident in the substance of its case, and the
standing of all the Plaintiffs to bring it before the Court, and will
continue to move forward for a judgment on the merits regardless of
Defendants' vigorous attempts to derail it with procedural roadblocks.

File their response to the Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary
Injunction by April 7.

He told the Plaintiffs to:

File their response to HUD's Motion to Dismiss addressing the
procedural challenges other than standing, i.e. ripeness and sovereign
immunity by April 7.

Yes, HUD is claiming that the case is not yet ripe, because they have
not yet officially approved it; regardless of their continued demand
that Public Housing has to be rebuilt at Cedar Terrace and Magnolia Homes!